Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Would be interesting to see the performance of Python's overallocation algo compared to a simpler one like Lua's, which just overallocates to the next power of 2 (so if you have a list with 4 items and want to add, it jumps to 8, then 16, then 32). I can't imagine the bitwise operations adding up to that much time added in Python, but Lua needs to increase size much less the larger the list (after 7 iterations Lua has room for 64 items, Python only 46 according to that link). Interesting choices, wonder which optimizes for what.

Would love to get Ierusalimschy and van Rossum in a room together and let them talk it out.

Even with only 25% growth per realloc, you hit logarithmic overhead (only with a higher k because more actual copying.)

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact